A list of Modern Sporty Cars

[eiriksmil]

I thought I should maybe make a small list of sports cars, the most meaningful in my eyes. Some of them are not the most powerful, but it's the ones showing changes, ending eras or describes the brands best. And I love every one of them here. I will surerly update this a lot, add more brands and models to the list.

Alfa Romeo Brera

Year: 2006

Engine: 3175 cc, DOCH, V6, 24 valves

Performance: 256 BHP, 322 nm/237 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 6.8 s, Top Speed: 240 kmh/149 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: AWD



Aston Martin V8 Vantage

Year: 2005

Engine: 4280 cc, DOCH, V8, 32 valves

Performance: 379 BHP, 410 Nm/302 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.9 s, Top Speed: 280 kmh/174 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: RWD



Bentley Continental GT

Year: 2004

Engine: 5998 cc, DOCH, W12, 48 valves

Performance: 552 BHP, 650 nm/479 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.7 s, Top Speed: 319 kmh/198 mph

Aspiration: Twin Turbo

Drive: AWD



Chevrolet Corvette Z06

Year: 2005

Engine: 7011 cc, OHV, V8, 16 valves

Performance: 505.BHP, 637 Nm/470 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 3.9 s, Top Speed: 320 kmh/200 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: RWD



Chrysler 300C SRT-8

Year: 2004

Engine: 6059 cc, OHV, V8, 16 valves

Performance: 425 BHP, 569 Nm/420 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.7 s, Top Speed: 278 kmh/173 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: RWD



Ferrari 355

Year: 1994

Engine: 3496 cc, DOCH, V8, 40 valves

Performance: 375 BHP, 363 Nm/268 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.6 s, Top Speed: 295 kmh/183 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: RWD



Ford Focus ST

Year: 2005

Engine: 2521 cc, DOCH, Inline 5, 20 valves

Performance: 222 BHP, 320 Nm/236 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 6.5 s, Top Speed: 241 kmh/150 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: FWD


Honda Integra Type-R

Year: 1997

Engine: B18C, 1797 cc, DOCH VTEC, Inline 4, 16 valves

Performance: 200 BHP, 206 Nm/152 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 6.1 s, Top Speed: 217 kmh/135 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: FWD


Lotus Exige S

Year: 2006

Engine: 2ZZ-GE, 1796 cc, DOCH VVT-i, Inline 4, 16 valves

Performance: 218 BHP, 215 Nm/159 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.1 s, Top Speed: 238 kmh/148 mph

Aspiration: Super Charged

Drive: RWD



Mazda RX-7 RZ

Year: 1998

Engine: 2616 cc, Rotary, EFi

Performance: 280 BHP, 314 Nm/232 lb ft, 0-60 mph: na, Top Speed: na

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: RWD



Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution IX

Year: 2006

Engine: 4G63, 1997 cc, DOCH MIVEC, Inline 4, 16 valves

Performance: 286 BHP, 400 Nm/295 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.9 s, Top Speed: 250 kmh/155 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: AWD



Nissan Skyline R34 GT-R

Year: 1998

Engine: RB26DETT, 2569 cc, DOCH, Inline 6, 24 valves

Performance: 276 BHP, 392 Nm/289 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 5.2 s, Top Speed: 250 kmh/155 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: AWD



Porsche 911 997 Turbo

Year: 2006

Engine: 3600 cc, DOCH, Boxer 6, 24 valves

Performance: 473 BHP, 680 Nm/502 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 3.8 s, Top Speed: 310 kmh/193 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: AWD



Renualt Clio RenaultSport 3

Year: 2006

Engine: 1998 cc, DOCH, Inline 4, 16 valves

Performance: 194 BHP, 215 Nm/159 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 6.8 s, Top Speed: 215 kmh/134 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: FWD



Seat Leon Cupra R

Year: 2004

Engine: 1781 cc, DOCH, Inline 4, 20 valves

Performance: 222 BHP, 280 Nm/207 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 6.8 s, Top Speed: 242 kmh/150 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: FWD



Subaru Impreza WRX STi MY06

Year: 2006

Engine: 2457 cc, DOCH, Boxer 4, 16 valves

Performance: 276 BHP, 392 Nm/289 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.9 s, Top Speed: 255 kmh/158 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: AWD


Toyota Supra Mk IV

Year: 1993

Engine: 2997 cc, DOCH, Inline 6, 24 valves

Performance: 325 BHP, 441 Nm/325 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 6.3 s, Top Speed: 250 kmh/155 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: RWD


TVR Cerbera 4.5

Year: 1998

Engine: 4475 cc, DOCH, V8, 16 valves

Performance: 420 BHP, 515 Nm/380 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 4.1 s, Top Speed: 290kmh/180 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: RWD


Volkswagen Golf III VR6

Year: 1991

Engine: 2792 cc, SOCH, V6, 12 valves

Performance: 174 BHP, 234 Nm/173 lb ft, 0-60 mph: 7.1 s, Top Speed: 220kmh/137 mph

Aspiration: NA

Drive: FWD


Volvo 740 TIC

Year: 1985

Engine: 1986 cc, SOCH, Inline 4, 8 valves

Performance: 157 BHP, 240 Nm/177 lb ft, 0-60 mph: na, Top Speed: 195kmh/121 mph

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: RWD

 

[IMADreamer]

By definition a lot of those cars aren't sports cars. They are "sporty cars". As sports car is two seats, two doors, RWD.

I am also curious as to why you think the 300C SRT-8, 06 WRX STi, 06 EVO, and ITR are significant at all? They didn't change automotive history, they weren't ground breaking, and when all is said and done thirty years from now cars guys will look back and go "oh yeah I remember those cars they were cool". They won't look back on them like they will a Skyline, Z06, or 911. The only exception may be the ITR which will be looked at as somewhat more significant, but the others no.

 

[eiriksmil]

By definition a lot of those cars aren't sports cars. They are "sporty cars". As sports car is two seats, two doors, RWD.

I am also curious as to why you think the 300C SRT-8, 06 WRX STi, 06 EVO, and ITR are significant at all? They didn't change automotive history, they weren't ground breaking, and when all is said and done thirty years from now cars guys will look back and go "oh yeah I remember those cars they were cool". They won't look back on them like they will a Skyline, Z06, or 911. The only exception may be the ITR which will be looked at as somewhat more significant, but the others no.

Not? The Evo IX ends production in the end of this year, in the US. Ends in 2007/2008 in the UK. After that, there's not going to be no more 4G63. The Evo as we know it, is history.
Toyota bought shares of Subaru, and rumours has it that much will be radically changed. In addition, the MY06 is a lot different from earlier Subarus, since it has a 2.5, not a 2.0 litre Boxer. It has always been 2.0, until now. Or, US has had the 2.5 a while, but now it's standard.
The Integra R is possibly the best FWD car ever made, and personally I think the DC2 Integra B18C Type-R JDM is a lot more interesting than the R34 Skyline RB26DETT GT-R JDM. Whereas the Skyline is overhyped, the Integra is overlooked.
The 300C is pure Chrysler, raw, hard and exciting. You can say that about the rest of the 2007 line-up in the Chrysler-range.

I must quote myself:

Some of them are not the most powerful, but it's the ones showing changes, ending eras or describes the brands best.

The Evo IX and STi MY ends eras, while the SRT-8 shows changes (something's happening at Chrysler) plus describing brand, while the Integra, with it's rev-happy B18C is possibly more Honda than any modern Hondas. More hardcore.


A pure slip-of-the-pen in calling these "Sports cars". A title-change to "A list of Modern Sporty Cars" would be great.

 

[IMADreamer]

Not? The Evo IX ends production in the end of this year, in the US. Ends in 2007/2008 in the UK. After that, there's not going to be no more 4G63. The Evo as we know it, is history.
Toyota bought shares of Subaru, and rumours has it that much will be radically changed. In addition, the MY06 is a lot different from earlier Subarus, since it has a 2.5, not a 2.0 litre Boxer. It has always been 2.0, until now. Or, US has had the 2.5 a while, but now it's standard.
The Integra R is possibly the best FWD car ever made, and personally I think the DC2 Integra B18C Type-R JDM is a lot more interesting than the R34 Skyline RB26DETT GT-R JDM. Whereas the Skyline is overhyped, the Integra is overlooked.
The 300C is pure Chrysler, raw, hard and exciting. You can say that about the rest of the 2007 line-up in the Chrysler-range.

I must quote myself:



The Evo IX and STi MY ends eras, while the SRT-8 shows changes (something's happening at Chrysler) plus describing brand, while the Integra, with it's rev-happy B18C is possibly more Honda than any modern Hondas. More hardcore.


A pure slip-of-the-pen in calling these "Sports cars". A title-change to "A list of Modern Sporty Cars" would be great.

The WRX STi was a 2.5l before this year. The base WRX was the 2.0 before MY06. There are some changes to the STi but I'm not sure you can call them significant. Plus the car will still be around for a few more years in it's current form.

As automotive history sees it the R34 Skyline is a much more significant car then the ITR. The ITR probably is the most sporty FWD car ever made but the Skyline showed the world that the Japanese could build a car that could run with the big boys of the automotive world. I don't know how old you are so I don't know if you remember it or not but when the R34 GT-R came out it was a pretty big splash because it was competing with the European GT cars in magazine comparos and it was blistering fast around road courses. I like the fact you aren't picking the GT-R just because it's in huge demand right now and was the Japanese "it" car for the last few years but I'm not sure I would go with the ITR as more significant.

I still don't see the Evo as significant. If you want to talk about the 4g63 and all that it's probably a 1g DSM that is more significant then the Evo.

As for the 300c SRT-8. Eh, it's been done. Big hp in a big family car. Nothing new really.

oh whatever, don't mind me. It's a slow day at work and I am in an arguementative move. I respect your personal list of significant cars. Variety is what makes the world interesting.

 

[Poverty]

The Evo is significant, as it picked up where the UrQuattro left off, and in everyday driving conditions would crap all over TVR's, Z06's, M3's, M6's, 911's.

It was a significant car.

The JDM impreza is still a 2.0

 

[eiriksmil]

The WRX STi was a 2.5l before this year. The base WRX was the 2.0 before MY06. There are some changes to the STi but I'm not sure you can call them significant. Plus the car will still be around for a few more years in it's current form.

As automotive history sees it the R34 Skyline is a much more significant car then the ITR. The ITR probably is the most sporty FWD car ever made but the Skyline showed the world that the Japanese could build a car that could run with the big boys of the automotive world. I don't know how old you are so I don't know if you remember it or not but when the R34 GT-R came out it was a pretty big splash because it was competing with the European GT cars in magazine comparos and it was blistering fast around road courses. I like the fact you aren't picking the GT-R just because it's in huge demand right now and was the Japanese "it" car for the last few years but I'm not sure I would go with the ITR as more significant.

I still don't see the Evo as significant. If you want to talk about the 4g63 and all that it's probably a 1g DSM that is more significant then the Evo.

As for the 300c SRT-8. Eh, it's been done. Big hp in a big family car. Nothing new really.

oh whatever, don't mind me. It's a slow day at work and I am in an arguementative move. I respect your personal list of significant cars. Variety is what makes the world interesting.

Sure. The NSX was also a hugely respectable car, and a wonderfully balanced machine. The RB26DETT has been around for a while. And the problem is, while the RB26DETT from the R34 GT-R is capable of big power, the 4G63 also is. You can also see, that Mitsbishi make more torque in the IX than Nissan did with the R34 GT-R. Everyone can make big hp, of course. But I am much more interested in a 2.0 litre Inline 4 making around 400 Nm, than a larger 2.5 litre making less. Of course, the Evo is 9 years newer. But still the GT-R costs big bucks to import, especially to the US. The insurance is higher, the running costs are higher, etc. The 2006 Evolution RS is bugdet AWD, with 400 Nm. The Evo is lighter, and so on.
I am soon 16, to answer your comment about my age. The thing is, all "automotive interested" people in my age, refer to the Skyline as the best car in the world. For sure, it's capable enough. But personally, I would much rather have a Pulsar GT-R, a 2006 Evo RS or a 1995 Honda Integra Type-R. While a Skyline stands as the ultimate dream car for some, the same people might refer to the Integra Type-R as rice. The Integra has proven to be one of the finest front wheel drive cars ever. Maybe that's why it doesn't count, because it's front wheel drive? As I've said at least one time now, the Integra is pure Honda, rev-happy, light, hardcore and innovative, and a leader for it's segment (an ITR over a Celica T-Sport any day). That's why it's here.

I also said the US has had the 2.5 Impreza STi for a while. Since 2003, after what I remember. Or 2005, maybe. Well, in the US, it's been around, as I've told you. I also said that Europe adopted it, if you didn't understand what I meant with it now being standard. In addition to that, Japan will probably also introduce it with 2.5 soon.

The 300C isn't what you could call new, or innovative, no. But I still think it shows Chrysler's got something running. OHV technology isn't new, neither is much power in a family car. But for the very first time, I find a Chrysler family car desirable.

And by the way, I think no list of great cars are complete without the Evo and Impreza. Both in rally and on the road, they are astonishing. And not to mention the real world capabilites. Could a Ferrari 355 go around the west coast of Ireland the same way an Evo would tear it up? No, Sir.

 

[GilesGuthrie]

A title-change to "A list of Modern Sporty Cars" would be great.

Done as requested.

 

[eiriksmil]

Done as requested.

Great!

 

[IMADreamer]

And by the way, I think no list of great cars are complete without the Evo and Impreza. Both in rally and on the road, they are astonishing. And not to mention the real world capabilites. Could a Ferrari 355 go around the west coast of Ireland the same way an Evo would tear it up? No, Sir.

I think I get your point on everything. While I disagree some I understand why you think that way and that's cool.

As for your last statement there, I'm not sure. I have never been to Ireland. lol For everyday useability the Evo and WRX are great no doubt. I'm not sure comparing them with a Ferrari 355 in the usability department is a great way to go about it. Evos and WRXs are everyday cars while the 355 is definately not. No one would use it for that purpose. On a terms of automotive greatness the WRX or EVO are not in the same universe as the 355. The 355 was the first truely great modern (post 1980) Ferrari. It's as significant as they come as far as Ferraris are concerned. No it's not a supercar like an Enzo, but it reclaimed Ferraris prestige from the Honda NSX in a forcefull way. It was head and shoulders above the NSX, it brought paddle shifters to the world and it was a work of art. So I think comparing it to the EVO or WRX in any way is a little far fetched. They are two different animals for two different purposes.

I have been thinking of a short list of significant cars from the late 80s to now. Keep in mind these are going to be mainly USDM cars because my knowledge of Euro and other cars that we don't get in the US is still pretty limited, but I am learning. I'm just going with sporty cars. I could go on about hybrids, saftey technology and so on but that's boring. So just sporty cars for me.

Honda NSX: shocked the world. Introduced VTEC Honda made a super car and it scared the bejesus out of Ferrari.

Dodge Viper: American muscle was back and in a big way when it was introduced and then with the birth of the SRT-10 it became a beast that would help spur on the horsepower wars as we know them today.

Ferrari 355: As I said earlier it's the first significant Ferrari in the modern era and was Ferraris answer to the NSX.

Honda Civic: your everyday transportation for some and rice rocket for others. The car that started the sport compact scene.

Mazda RX 7: Not the first rotary but it came in a package that wooed automotive journalist. It wasn't the power so much but the suspension and balance that made the car truely great.

Skyline GT-R R34: While not a hugely known car really it's significant because of it's ability. Amazing handling packaged with a good amount of power and this car easily competes with some of the best cars in the world.

C5 Corvette: Brought the Corvette out of it's dark ages and entered it into the horsepower wars. While initially the C5 was no monster car it did handle well and made a splash in organized racing.

C6 Z06 Corvette: The culmination of all that Corvette heritage. Truely one of the greatest cars ever built and at a bargin price.

McClaren F1: Still the standard that super cars are measured by

Ferrari Enzo: Some debate to be had here, but I think it's significant for all the technology that the car has. It was truely remarkable when it debuted although now sitting amoung the likes of the Veyron and Zonda it's lost a little luster.

Bugatti Veyron: Never before and never again will we see a car like this.

the new mustang: While retro styling began with the PT Cruiser the new mustang is the pennical of that trend. The legend was reborn and the tired old previous platform was put to rest. In terms of technology it's nothing significant but in terms of poise, heritage, and so on it's very significant. Ford's bread and butter car was dying a slow painfull death in the early part of the new century and the new Mustang was what the marquee needed.

 

[Ghost C]

I'm going to overlook the entire rest of the thread and go on record saying that the Integra Type R is not the sportiest FWD car ever made, nor is it overlooked. It's overhyped, just like the GT-R mentioned in the same paragraph, probably moreso.

The sportiest, and best handling, FWD car ever is the Lotus Elan M100/S2. Aside from the terrible idea of making it convertible only, it totally beats the pants off of any ITR ever built. Ever. And it really is overlooked.

 

[Tornado]

I'm going to overlook the entire rest of the thread and go on record saying that the Integra Type R is not the sportiest FWD car ever made, nor is it overlooked. It's overhyped, just like the GT-R mentioned in the same paragraph, probably moreso.

I'm just gonna say that the GT-R did what it was designed to do. Nothing more, nothing less; and it's the FNF losers and Nissan fanboys that overplayed it. I would personally prefer a 300ZX TT.

The sportiest, and best handling, FWD car ever is the Lotus Elan M100/S2. Aside from the terrible idea of making it convertible only, it totally beats the pants off of any ITR ever built. Ever. And it really is overlooked.

I'd have to agree with Ghost C on this. The ITR is not an overlooked car in any way. The GM Elan is, because when it came out it was laughed off of the scene because it was a Miata competitor that was FWD, regardless of how well it handled. As to whether the Elan is a better sports car, well...

 

[1X83Z]

I'm going to overlook the entire rest of the thread and go on record saying that the Integra Type R is not the sportiest FWD car ever made, nor is it overlooked. It's overhyped, just like the GT-R mentioned in the same paragraph, probably moreso.

The sportiest, and best handling, FWD car ever is the Lotus Elan M100/S2. Aside from the terrible idea of making it convertible only, it totally beats the pants off of any ITR ever built. Ever. And it really is overlooked.

I agree wholly with what you've said except for what you've termed overlooked and overhyped.

No - the ITR is not the sportiest front-driver ever, but I really do think it's overlooked. Except on forums like this one, very few people (particularly non-enthusiasts) are even aware there was a Type-R product sold here. I know it's hard to think like a non-car person when you're consistently surrounded by car people but really - it's an overlooked car if you're not a die-hard enthusiast. Honestly, if the ITR sold here had received more hype rather than a general clamor for another one, I think the Evo and STi would've been more forthcoming.

I also agree that the Elan S2 is the best-handling front-driver on the planet, but I'm not sure that it's overlooked. In fact, whenever there's a discussion of the best front-drivers on the planet, someone always chimes in "Elan S2" quite early in the conversation. It's got the same problem as the Integra in that it's overlooked by non-car people, but I don't think it's really that underrated.

 

[IMADreamer]

I honestly didn't know the elan S2 was FWD. I have a lot to learn when it comes to European cars. I'm working on it though.

The ITR is a great FWD car though. To overlook it and discredit it as a ricers overhyped machine is fairly ignorant. I say the same for the Skyline GT-R. It's a fantastic car, or atleast every car mag review I ever read about it says so. I haven't even driven one so I don't know. Has it's popularity exploded since the whole Fast and Furious thing? Sure but does that make it any less great? I don't think so. Just because some non-car people bow to it like it's the greatest thing ever doesn't mean it sucks. It's blistering fast around a track. That's what it's supposed to do and it does it very well. What more can you ask for?

 

[1X83Z]

It's blistering fast around a track. That's what it's supposed to do and it does it very well. What more can you ask for?

To my knowledge it's also the quickest Honda product ever sold in the United States with the exception of the NSX, with a 0-60 time of 6.2 seconds (and that doesn't even speak to its handling, which is spectacular). Though, admittedly, the S2000 and new TL are quite close in acceleration.

Trivia: the 1992-1993 Acura Integra GS-R is a basically unknown 170hp 2nd-generation Integra (the Type-R was a 3rd-gen model) with very similar acceleration times. It goes for about half of what Type-Rs go for.

 

[Duke]

...and the GS-R is available as a four door. If you like that kind of thing.

 

[Poverty]

ITR isnt overrated.

8'40 - Chevrolet Corvette C5 automatic - 1999
8'41 - Aston Martin DB7 - 1999
8'41 - Audi S3 - 1999
8'42 - Audi TT 1.8 quattro - 2000
8'42 - Audi S4 - 1998
8'43 - Honda Integra Type R - 2000
8'47 - Honda Civic Type-R - 2001
8'49 - Renault Clio Sport V6 - 2001
8'50 - Mercedes Benz E55 AMG - 2000
8'51 - Alfa Romeo 156 GTA - 2002
8'51 - Ford Focus ST - 2005
8'54 - VW Golf GTI 25th Anniversary - 2002
8'55 - Mini Cooper S Works - 2004
8'58 - Lotus Esprit Turbo SE - 1997
9'05 - Ford Focus RS - 2005
9'07 - Mercedes SLK 230 - 2001
9'07 - AMG Mercedes SLK 230 - 1999
9'09 - VW Golf V6 4Motion – 2002

 

[ND4SPD]

Mazda RX-7 RZ

Year: 1998

Engine: 2616 cc, Rotary, EFi

Performance: 280 BHP, 314 Nm/232 lb ft, 0-60 mph: na, Top Speed: na

Aspiration: Turbo

Drive: RWD

???
Where did you ever come up with 2616cc's?! Heck thats closer in displacement to Mazda's 4 rotor engine with 4x655cc's=2620cc's. Your source is a little off. Its actually 654x2 cc's which is 1308 cc's for the 13B-REW found in the 93-02 FD3S, hence the engine code 13b-rew.

 

[McLaren]

Not? The Evo IX ends production in the end of this year, in the US. Ends in 2007/2008 in the UK. After that, there's not going to be no more 4G63. The Evo as we know it, is history.

No offence, but that isn't true at all.

The Lancer Evolution 10 was actually just spotted in Nurburgring on the Nordschliefe.

 

[eiriksmil]

???
Where did you ever come up with 2616cc's?! Heck thats closer in displacement to Mazda's 4 rotor engine with 4x655cc's=2620cc's. Your source is a little off. Its actually 654x2 cc's which is 1308 cc's for the 13B-REW found in the 93-02 FD3S, hence the engine code 13b-rew.

Yep, but in byrocracy, they count it after 2616 cc. In Norway, for example, it would have been a nice touch to only pay for 1.3 litres, but no no, we pay for 2.6. I dunno how the US do it, or the UK for that matter, but some countries define it as a 2.6 litre.

No offence, but that isn't true at all.

The Lancer Evolution 10 was actually just spotted in Nurburgring on the Nordschliefe.

Ehem.. The Evo X will feature a new engine, possibly a 2.0 litre engine. What we know, is that it's not going to be the old 4G63 lump, which has been with us for 20 years, and in the Evo since the first Evo, the Lancer GSR/RS Evolution (CD9A-SNGF/SNDF), was first introduced 7 September 1992. With the TD05H-16G-7 turbo and a big bore exhaust, it made 250 bhp @ 6000 rpm and 227 lb ft of torque @ 3000 rpm.
Now, the 4G63 has got various upgrades as the models came, in 2005 it got a MIVEC (Mitsubishi Innovative Valve timing Electronic Control) valve timing, and as a result, the 4G63 now produces more power from stock, and responds even better to mods than before (some claim 400 whp on stock turbo).
The 4G63 is all over, so is a Lancer-based Evo. The new model, the Evo X, will possibly just be named "Mitsubishi Evolution X", or just "Mitsubishi Evolution". Ironically, the Evo X has evolved in the opposite direction, from the Mitsubishi Lancer GSR/RS Evolution we saw in 1992.
The new Evo X will be built on a new Chrysler-platform with new Chrysler-engine. Sales of the Evo IX ends in the fall 2006, with the limited run IX SE.


A quote from owner Tom at Huntington Beach Mitsubishi, CA:

Don't kill yourself (or want to trade in your current one) if you bought an MR. The SE version is only cosmetic: front air dam extensions, side sill extentions, red stiching on the seats, and the BBS wheels are "Black Diamond Finish". Colors are only silver, GG, and black. No pricing yet, but not much upcharge.

The GSR SE is a little more substantial: same red stiching as the MR, black diamond BBS, aluminum roof, HIDs, and the front air dam and side sill extensions. Same colors as the MR SE. No pricing yet, but it is to be between the current IX and the MR. I read that as a $2000 charge for the SE package. Is it worth it? That's up to you guys to decide. I would not trade a current GSR for one, that doesn't make sense. I wouldn't stress if I just bought a GSR. Other than the HIDs, everybody makes their car their own SE anyway.

The SE is produced in July and August. August is the final production date of the Evo as we know it. The SEs will arrive in the states in August and September. As I have indicated earlier, the Evo will not be produced for the states again until February of 2008 as a 2009 X

In Britain, there has just been presented a new FQ-360, and the IX will continue throughout 2007, and probably also in the start of 2008. Then in 2008, the Evolution X, with new engine, new interior, new exterior, etc. The original Lancer Evo ends in 2007/08, as I said in the first post. It has been a long life, since the first Evos were sold 19 October 1992, to the last IX is being produced in the start of 2008.

Therefore, indeed, the Evo IX was just spotted at the 'Ring. Because it's a brand new car, with no 4G63, no Lancer-badge probably, no old Evo I roofline, no history, or anything else as we know today. A brand new car.
And as I said, the Evo as we know it, is history.
I think I've got my facts straight.

Best Regards

Eiriksmil

Moderator @ www.evolutionforums.com, a forum concerning the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution.

 

[Pebb]

I would not call the Bentley Continental GT sporty, more like luxury.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

I would not call the Bentley Continental GT sporty, more like luxury.

Who said you can't mix sport(iness) and luxury?

 

[1X83Z]

Who said you can't mix sport(iness) and luxury?

I agree that you can mix sportiness and luxury, but the Bentley Continental GT does not do that. Instead, it mixes an elephant and an oil tanker.

Fact: at more than two and a half tons, the Continental GT weighs more than any minivan on sale in the United States. A comparison between the Conti GT and some randomly selected cars, trucks, SUVs, and vans:

Hummer H2 - 6400lbs
Cadillac Escalade - 5818lbs
Bentley Continental GT - 5313lbs
Audi Q7 - 5269lbs.
Volkswagen Touareg - 5086lbs
Ford F-150 extended cab - 5015lbs
Lexus GX470 - 4871lbs
Nissan Pathfinder - 4629lbs
Ford Explorer - 4615lbs
Mercury Monterey - 4492lbs
Honda Pilot - 4453lbs
Subaru B9 Tribeca - ugly
Lexus LS430 - 3990lbs
Dodge Magnum - 3855lbs
GMC Canyon crew cab - 3677lbs
Mercedes CLK320 coupe - 3585lbs
Lexus ES350 - 3580lbs
Kia Sportage: 3406lbs
Mazda 6 sedan - 3091lbs
Suzuki Aerio - 2661lbs
Chevrolet Aveo 5-door - 2359lbs

Do things get heavier?

 

[Tornado]

Well, you could buy a Chevrolet SSR, which mixes heaviness (5000+ lbs.) with slow speed (300 BHP) and absense of luxury (fake aluminum trim everywhere).

 

[1X83Z]

Well, you could buy a Chevrolet SSR, which mixes heaviness (5000+ lbs.) with slow speed (300 BHP) and absense of luxury (fake aluminum trim everywhere).

Yes, it'd be the worst of all worlds. Cost was a factor too - $42600 was the base price! The one thing I'll give the SSR is that it was visually stunning - I saw one today and I really enjoy looking at it. But its drawbacks are primarily what you named plus its cost (and handling wasn't good for a 2-seat convertible, though for a pickup it was stellar), though it should be noted that it was only sold with the 300hp 5.3-liter V8 (0-60 in 7.5) in 2004, after which it was upgraded to a 390hp 6-liter, which gave it a sub-6 second 0-60 time.

By the way, the Bentley Continental GT is 600lbs heavier than the SSR.

 

[McLaren]

Ehem.. The Evo X will feature a new engine, possibly a 2.0 litre engine. What we know, is that it's not going to be the old 4G63 lump, which has been with us for 20 years, and in the Evo since the first Evo, the Lancer GSR/RS Evolution (CD9A-SNGF/SNDF), was first introduced 7 September 1992. With the TD05H-16G-7 turbo and a big bore exhaust, it made 250 bhp @ 6000 rpm and 227 lb ft of torque @ 3000 rpm.
Now, the 4G63 has got various upgrades as the models came, in 2005 it got a MIVEC (Mitsubishi Innovative Valve timing Electronic Control) valve timing, and as a result, the 4G63 now produces more power from stock, and responds even better to mods than before (some claim 400 whp on stock turbo).
The 4G63 is all over, so is a Lancer-based Evo. The new model, the Evo X, will possibly just be named "Mitsubishi Evolution X", or just "Mitsubishi Evolution". Ironically, the Evo X has evolved in the opposite direction, from the Mitsubishi Lancer GSR/RS Evolution we saw in 1992.
The new Evo X will be built on a new Chrysler-platform with new Chrysler-engine. Sales of the Evo IX ends in the fall 2006, with the limited run IX SE.

SO it's got a new engine. Big deal. It's still a Lancer Evolution to us who just see it on the road. I mean, hell, that's like saying the M3 is out of production because it went from a Inline-6 to a V8, and a completely restyled body.

 

[Jay]

Well, you could buy a Chevrolet SSR, which mixes heaviness (5000+ lbs.) with slow speed (300 BHP) and absense of luxury (fake aluminum trim everywhere).

Oh my the SSR weighs that much? I had heard it was built on a truck chassis but I didn't think it would be that heavy. (I have seen a few 2004 models at Chevrolet dealers on my travels back in 04)

 

[eiriksmil]

SO it's got a new engine. Big deal. It's still a Lancer Evolution to us who just see it on the road. I mean, hell, that's like saying the M3 is out of production because it went from a Inline-6 to a V8, and a completely restyled body.

Not if it's still built on a 3-series chassis. As long as the M3 is built on the 3-series chassis, it's an M3.
As long as the Evo is built on a Lancer-chassis, it's a Lancer Evo.
If the M3 was to be built on a Rolls Royce baby chassis, and not on a 3-series chassis, with the 3-series Sedan and Touring, Coupe and Convertible still in production, it wouldn't have been an M3 any more..

 

[1X83Z]

Not if it's still built on a 3-series chassis. As long as the M3 is built on the 3-series chassis, it's an M3.
As long as the Evo is built on a Lancer-chassis, it's a Lancer Evo.
If the M3 was to be built on a Rolls Royce baby chassis, and not on a 3-series chassis, with the 3-series Sedan and Touring, Coupe and Convertible still in production, it wouldn't have been an M3 any more..

As much as I didn't agree with your earlier statement, I do agree now. I don't believe they're taking off the Lancer platform. I guess that's just a testament to a) how much of a success the Evo is and b) how truly ****ty the Lancer is. Indeed VIPERGTRS01 it'll look just like another Evo but this is probably the most significant change to the range since debut.

 

[YSSMAN]

Well, you could buy a Chevrolet SSR, which mixes heaviness (5000+ lbs.) with slow speed (300 BHP) and absense of luxury (fake aluminum trim everywhere).

Please allow my GM colors to fly for a moment:

1) The origional SSR sucked, no bones about it. Combining an altered Trailblazer chassis with a 300 BHP 5.3L V8 and a 4L80E didn't work out well, but whatever. Atleast it looked nice...

2) The last of the SSRs were allright, for the most part what they should of been. With 400 BHP and the 6-speed T-56 lifted from the Corvette. Performance was good, actually similar to that of the GTO equipped with the same parts. Of course, it couldn't hide the fact it was a truck, so again, whatever.